Author
Topic: To Tell or Not to Tell (Read 6936 times)

Unless there's a rule, telling the boss won't put you in a good light with anyone (boss included). Even if there is a rule, don't name names or give details. You can just say something general enough so the boss can send out a reminder that evaluations are not to be shared.

I would say that you should tell boss the things that might affect work. Candy and Mandy talking to each other really doesn't affect antying , but coercing Rhonda and then getting annoyed might.

I might say "Boss, I just wanted to let you know that Candy and Mandy were discussing their evaluations with each other which is fine and not why I am here, but then they were coercing Rhonda into revealing her ratings and it seemed like there was some animosity because Rhonda's score was higher. I just wanted to give you a heads up in case you see some issues between them."

I like this.

I don't. It establishing something that doesn't exist. As a boss, I wouldn't want to hear this sort of speculation.

These three may work this out themselves; usually people do--that animosity doesn't last that long. But bringing it to the boss's attention might actually make it MORE likely to last.

And as a boss (which I am), I don't want to hear this kind of stuff. I don't even really want to hear it AFTER the animosity has created trouble in the work space. I don't care.

And that's your prerogative. But I would not feel right just standing by if a co-worker (Rhonda) was pressured and then made the subject of animosity. Especially if it concerned a breach in company policy.

I would say that you should tell boss the things that might affect work. Candy and Mandy talking to each other really doesn't affect antying , but coercing Rhonda and then getting annoyed might.

I might say "Boss, I just wanted to let you know that Candy and Mandy were discussing their evaluations with each other which is fine and not why I am here, but then they were coercing Rhonda into revealing her ratings and it seemed like there was some animosity because Rhonda's score was higher. I just wanted to give you a heads up in case you see some issues between them."

I like this.

I don't. It establishing something that doesn't exist. As a boss, I wouldn't want to hear this sort of speculation.

These three may work this out themselves; usually people do--that animosity doesn't last that long. But bringing it to the boss's attention might actually make it MORE likely to last.

And as a boss (which I am), I don't want to hear this kind of stuff. I don't even really want to hear it AFTER the animosity has created trouble in the work space. I don't care.

And that's your prerogative. But I would not feel right just standing by if a co-worker (Rhonda) was pressured and then made the subject of animosity. Especially if it concerned a breach in company policy.

If somebody is being harrassed by coworkers at work, during work hours, about a work related practice I am not sure the question should be "does the boss care" but "is the boss liable". There are plenty of bosses who don't care about safety violations, sexual harrassmeny threats, etc. Not caring is a pretty lousy yardstick.

I am sure that when peoplr have faced sexual or racial harrassment and intimidation in the wlrkplace the argument that they are an adult and can take care of themselves has been trotted out. Perhaps one of her reasons for staying quiet right now is that it seems to be.2 agsinst 1 with nobody to verify their treatment of her.

... They also speculated in a whisper about who they though should get fired. I then heard Mandy say that she scored lower on one part of the evaluation because of some "dumb *female dog* who is too sensitive." ...

I'd stay totally out of this if it were me.

However, do you think Mandy was referring to Rhonda with that remark, or was she referring to you?

I would say that you should tell boss the things that might affect work. Candy and Mandy talking to each other really doesn't affect antying , but coercing Rhonda and then getting annoyed might.

I might say "Boss, I just wanted to let you know that Candy and Mandy were discussing their evaluations with each other which is fine and not why I am here, but then they were coercing Rhonda into revealing her ratings and it seemed like there was some animosity because Rhonda's score was higher. I just wanted to give you a heads up in case you see some issues between them."

I like this.

I don't. It establishing something that doesn't exist. As a boss, I wouldn't want to hear this sort of speculation.

These three may work this out themselves; usually people do--that animosity doesn't last that long. But bringing it to the boss's attention might actually make it MORE likely to last.

And as a boss (which I am), I don't want to hear this kind of stuff. I don't even really want to hear it AFTER the animosity has created trouble in the work space. I don't care.

And that's your prerogative. But I would not feel right just standing by if a co-worker (Rhonda) was pressured and then made the subject of animosity. Especially if it concerned a breach in company policy.

Surely Rhonda is an adult and can handle herself, though, right?

I don't believe that the state of being her being an adult relieves me of responsibility. YMMV

... They also speculated in a whisper about who they though should get fired. I then heard Mandy say that she scored lower on one part of the evaluation because of some "dumb *female dog* who is too sensitive." ...

I'd stay totally out of this if it were me.

However, do you think Mandy was referring to Rhonda with that remark, or was she referring to you?

I sort of feel that the quote could have been made about me because Mandy and I really don't get a long well.

I thought about telling the boss because this just seemed really unprofessional. I think my judgement was clouded because I have has people (I.e. Mandy) tattle on me about things and it has left me quite irritated. I think I will just keep everything to myself.

If somebody is being harrassed by coworkers at work, during work hours, about a work related practice I am not sure the question should be "does the boss care" but "is the boss liable". There are plenty of bosses who don't care about safety violations, sexual harrassmeny threats, etc. Not caring is a pretty lousy yardstick.

I am sure that when peoplr have faced sexual or racial harrassment and intimidation in the wlrkplace the argument that they are an adult and can take care of themselves has been trotted out. Perhaps one of her reasons for staying quiet right now is that it seems to be.2 agsinst 1 with nobody to verify their treatment of her.

I think that they you are jumping the gun. One incident of this nature is not on the same line as what you mentioned. If their behavior gets worse, than yes, saying something to the boss at that point would be appropriate. To do it now is to create mountains where they may be a mole hill. If anything, maybe saying something to Rhonda to let her know you heard and you feel they treated her badly would be appropriate so she knows that she isn't by herself and if Rhonda feels the situation is worse than the OP is aware of, then she'll know she has some support and can go from there.

Logged

"The test of good manners is to be patient with bad ones" - Solomon ibn Gabirol

You could also talk to Rhonda and say that she doesn't have to share her evaluations with Candy and Mandy if she doesn't want to, it is up to her.

Quote

If anything, maybe saying something to Rhonda to let her know you heard and you feel they treated her badly would be appropriate so she knows that she isn't by herself and if Rhonda feels the situation is worse than the OP is aware of, then she'll know she has some support and can go from there.

I think this is a mistake. 1) It makes Rhonda look like a child who can't make her own decisions. 2) By talking to Rhonda OP is getting involved in something that reeks of high school and is none of her business.

If I was the supervisor and got wind of any of this, I would make sure that ALL parties had plenty of work to keep themselves busy.

I would say that you should tell boss the things that might affect work. Candy and Mandy talking to each other really doesn't affect antying , but coercing Rhonda and then getting annoyed might.

I might say "Boss, I just wanted to let you know that Candy and Mandy were discussing their evaluations with each other which is fine and not why I am here, but then they were coercing Rhonda into revealing her ratings and it seemed like there was some animosity because Rhonda's score was higher. I just wanted to give you a heads up in case you see some issues between them."

I like this.

I don't. It establishing something that doesn't exist. As a boss, I wouldn't want to hear this sort of speculation.

These three may work this out themselves; usually people do--that animosity doesn't last that long. But bringing it to the boss's attention might actually make it MORE likely to last.

And as a boss (which I am), I don't want to hear this kind of stuff. I don't even really want to hear it AFTER the animosity has created trouble in the work space. I don't care.

And that's your prerogative. But I would not feel right just standing by if a co-worker (Rhonda) was pressured and then made the subject of animosity. Especially if it concerned a breach in company policy.

The animosity has--so far--lasted, what, 25 seconds? There has only been ONE "social session."

And yes, Rhonda is a grownup. Plus, her personal comfort or discomfort with her coworkers is not my problem--this is not a social club, and I'm not responsible for that--as a boss. I wouldn't think well of any employee who indicated that I should be.

If the animosity lasted far longer AND began to affect the work day or the workflow, then I would want to know. But I still wouldn't care that much HOW it started.

If somebody is being harrassed by coworkers at work, during work hours, about a work related practice I am not sure the question should be "does the boss care" but "is the boss liable". There are plenty of bosses who don't care about safety violations, sexual harrassmeny threats, etc. Not caring is a pretty lousy yardstick.

I am sure that when peoplr have faced sexual or racial harrassment and intimidation in the wlrkplace the argument that they are an adult and can take care of themselves has been trotted out. Perhaps one of her reasons for staying quiet right now is that it seems to be.2 agsinst 1 with nobody to verify their treatment of her.

This is not analagous.

No. 1--this is not any of those things.No. 2--it hasn't lasted all that long yet!!

I am sure that when peoplr have faced sexual or racial harrassment and intimidation in the wlrkplace the argument that they are an adult and can take care of themselves has been trotted out

Even if that is true (and I'm not sure how one would know), sexual harassment and racial discrimination have nothing to do with the thread topic.

Why would harrassment over getting a better score on an evaluation be better or acceptable?

Many of the differences between these situations get into legal territory, so I don't think it's really within the purview of this forum. However, what we're dealing with her is a brief annoying conversation, which I don't think most employers would act on in a legal sense. Telling is just going to make everyone involved look immature.